I'm using abstinence as a line of demarcation to highlight an example of how one can approach stopping something.
There have been many here to say by not owning a gun they don't run the risk of ever being shot. While some say by ownin a gun they reduce their risk.

The angle is more about protection. Does a condom protect from std's? Sure. Is it 100%? Well no.
Does not having sex prevent std's? Sure. Is it 100%? Well depends. Some studies will say it causes more to explore or try other things to avoid full sex and leads to it anyway.

The point isn't about guns or sex though. Its about one group or the others approach to solving an issue.

Would banning all guns reduce killings? Sure. Especially by guns. Would having armed guards stop all killings at schools? Probably not.
So in our attempt at protection we conclude we end up testing the effectiveness of the protection. Sometimes with negative consequences.
We compare the US to other nations who have an abscence of guns and their success rates with deaths by guns.

Just thought it was a curious way of comparing the two social hot buttons. Not trying to say anything more than that.

I've never been against the armed guard idea...unless it is the band-aid on the open artery the NRA wants it to be.

I did find it comical that the same posters that are always "GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS ALWAYS TERRIBLE! I BALANCE MY CHECKBOOK BETTER THAN THE GOVERNMENT!" were suddenly like "Pay armed guards to attend every school so that my precious gun hoarding can continue? Great idea!"

"The armed resource officer who took the gun away was off-duty and at the school..."

Had he shot the kid, the lawsuits would already be filed...1. He was off duty- why was he carrying a weapon?2. He was off duty- why was he at the school?3. Do off-duty, armed cops ride around in their cruisers looking for crime?

Sorry, the thought of an armed, yet off-duty cop at the school gives me just as much cause for concern as the kid...

I'm curious as to why an armed off-duty cop is any different to an armed on-duty cop to you?

Did it say why that cop was there? His kid is there... something like that?

I've never been against the armed guard idea...unless it is the band-aid on the open artery the NRA wants it to be.

I did find it comical that the same posters that are always "GOVERNMENT SPENDING IS ALWAYS TERRIBLE! I BALANCE MY CHECKBOOK BETTER THAN THE GOVERNMENT!" were suddenly like "Pay armed guards to attend every school so that my precious gun hoarding can continue? Great idea!"

I would rather pay for armed gaurds at the schools than hooka habits of jordanian students. Sad point to this story is how long before some kids parents try to sue the armed gaurd who stopped the shooting?

I'm curious as to why an armed off-duty cop is any different to an armed on-duty cop to you?

Did it say why that cop was there? His kid is there... something like that?

It didn't say anything and I'm assuming nothing...

... just asking the questions.

And there is a huge difference between and armed on- duty vs. off-duty cop. In most states, off-duty cops cannot carry their service weapon- if they choose to carry off-duty it must be their personal weapon. And no, I'm not assuming which it was in this case, either.

And, in most states, off-duty cops carry far less authority than on-duty. For example, an off-duty cop cannot attempt to pull you over in his own car.

A former police officer in my city lost his job and the department was sued when an off-duty cop first pulled over a woman while he was driving his personal vehicle, flashed her his badge and reportedly showed her he was carrying his service weapon when she questioned what he wanted. There was no probable cause, witnesses said he maneuvered his vehicle in an unsafe manner and no one believed he was a cop so he started with the badge and gun thing.

And the complete opposite could be true of your questions. Maybe the cop has no kids, may he's a pedo and took the job as an SRO just to be around kids.... jus' sayin' you gotta ask all the questions.

It's not the "armed guard" thing that's inherently bad (although these guards are mostly in high schools where gang violence is a bigger problem). It's the thinking behind it, that the ONLY solution for gun violence is....more guns. It's a terrible thing for our kids to have to accept, and something we as adults should be working to reverse.